Saturday, May 24, 2008

Members Only

Proving once again that we may need to hold a national telethon to find a cure for fuckface-itis, Lieberman continues the epic calumniation of his former party and protégé:

The attack on America by Islamist terrorists shook President Bush from the foreign policy course he was on. He saw September 11 for what it was: a direct ideological and military attack on us and our way of life. If the Democratic Party had stayed where it was in 2000, America could have confronted the terrorists with unity and strength in the years after 9/11.

Instead a debate soon began within the Democratic Party about how to respond to Mr. Bush. I felt strongly that Democrats should embrace the basic framework the president had advanced for the war on terror as our own, because it was our own. But that was not the choice most Democratic leaders made. When total victory did not come quickly in Iraq, the old voices of partisanship and peace at any price saw an opportunity to reassert themselves. By considering centrism to be collaboration with the enemy – not bin Laden, but Mr. Bush – activists have successfully pulled the Democratic Party further to the left than it has been at any point in the last 20 years.


This is slimy beyond belief. It's just this week's iteration of the "appeasement" bullshit Bush shoveled on the Knesset last week. It is incontrovertible that the majority of Democrats signed on to Bush's plan well in advance of the invasion, and uttered nary a peep for well over a year. Even in 2004, when Bush postponed the initial siege of Fallujah from April to October, so he'd look tough come election time while his Texas butt-boys were swiftboating Kerry, most of the opposition was rhetorical at most.

The fact of the matter is that the Democrats did not oppose and confront Bush nearly enough in 2002. Everyone knew what the events of that summer were leading to; the more obnoxious proponents had a cats' chorus of "and there's not a goddamned thing you [traitorous liebruls] can do about it" providing the beat to their nonsensical -- and now throughly debunked -- arguments.

But Lieberman of all people should know full well that the opposition party failed utterly in doing even the basic parts of their job -- such as insisting on accuracy, accountability, probity, integrity. Instead, pallets of shrink-wrapped Franklins were dropped in the fucking desert while conservatard mezzofanucs vetted their subordinates in the occupation effort by asking them how they felt about Roe v. Wade. And Rumsfeld cracked wise about any and all questions and misgivings regarding his colossal clusterfuck. Indeed, Senator Lieberman, this is the rock from which true leadership is hewn. Fucking bozo.

At some point, it occurs to sensible people -- though certainly not Lieberman -- that opposition to Bush can also be understood as opposition to incompetence, to ineptitude, to the indifference that can only come to someone who has never had to be responsible for a single goddamned thing he's done in his life. And in his eagerness to ratfuck Obama, Lieberman might as well just publicly ask McCain for a cabinet position or veep slot, or whatever the hell he's after here. Just be done with it already, and in the meantime, could Harry Reid grow a pair and kick this mendacious fuck out of every committee chairmanship already? Say what you will about the Republicans, they wouldn't put up with this happy horseshit for a nanosecond.

Far too many Democratic leaders have kowtowed to these opinions rather than challenging them. That unfortunately includes Barack Obama, who, contrary to his rhetorical invocations of bipartisan change, has not been willing to stand up to his party's left wing on a single significant national security or international economic issue in this campaign.

In this, Sen. Obama stands in stark contrast to John McCain, who has shown the political courage throughout his career to do what he thinks is right – regardless of its popularity in his party or outside it.

John also understands something else that too many Democrats seem to have become confused about lately – the difference between America's friends and America's enemies.


Really? How many is "too many"? Who are the members of this fifth column, and in what way have they become confused between our friends and our enemies? In what way, given how Bush has lawndarted the country in a bewildered, ignorant stammer for over seven years so far, are the citizens of this country -- much less the countries he's willfully invaded -- supposed to regard him as more of a "friend" than an "enemy"? He sure hasn't done me or mine any fucking favors.

Take a tip from Ronald Reagan, folks -- simply ask yourself if you're better off now than you were four years ago, and put it up against what McCain might bother to change out of all that, to the extent that he (or anyone else) can change. He's going to continue the current Gilded Age economic policies, since too many people have huffed the free-marketeer doxologies that dictate that the less we tax the super-rich, the more money magically lands in all of our pockets. Any guesses as to who might bankroll those happy PR write-ups? Do we understand the clear vested interest that the corporate owners of media entities have in government policy, or are we content to thumb our dicks, watch Deal Or No Deal, wait for that winning lottery ticket, and wonder why shit never rolls our way?

And McCain, despite his almost theatrical repudiation of the Jew-baiting evangicarnies mucking up the big tent with their megachurch blocs, is practically guaranteed to endorse a socially conservative rollback on the usual issues, the better to keep an otherwise broken populace addled with incoherent fears of sodomy and Harry Potter in the classrooms.

One group that seems not to be buying into Holy Joe's Republitard hosannas is, well, Arizona Republicans.

A planned mega-fundraiser for the GOP, featuring President Bush and John McCain, has now been scaled back in the face of a daunting problem: Too few people actually wanted to buy tickets.

According to the Phoenix Business Journal, fundraiser set for this Tuesday in the city's convention center failed to sell enough tickets, leading to fears that the anti-Bush protesters might end up outnumbering actual attendees.

The new plan is for the Bush-McCain fundraising effort, which will benefit both the McCain campaign and the RNC, to be held in private residences in the Phoenix area away from media coverage.


Hee hee. They'd probably be better off digging up the mummified carcass of Bebe Rebozo than trotting out Li'l Lord 28%, but they certainly don't need my advice. They don't need no water, let the muthafucka burn. As long as they take Connecticut's Taint with them.

3 comments:

  1. And just think, he coulda been our vice-president all this time! Thanksralph!

    (Funny how they never seem to mention that part when raking Nader over the coals.)

    ReplyDelete
  2. Good point. Their noses should definitely be rubbed in that one.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I think Gore would have told him to shut his yap and stick to giving fruit baskets to old ladies...

    but anyway Heywood, this is a great post. You are so right and I feel rage every time I think that it was the REPUBLICANS in conn that voted this turd back into office. after he lied about the war.

    and yet, something was missing...

    "As long as they BLOW ME and take Connecticut's Taint with them."

    There you go fixed your last sentance...

    ReplyDelete